tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8419444332771213285.post7544875028356239406..comments2024-03-28T11:51:19.078-07:00Comments on Caltrain HSR Compatibility Blog: Thoughts on Palo AltoClemhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/01374282217135682245noreply@blogger.comBlogger58125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8419444332771213285.post-17735956922222608212017-12-23T12:53:12.117-08:002017-12-23T12:53:12.117-08:00Berkeley’s $20M bond in 1966 would be equivalent t...Berkeley’s $20M bond in 1966 would be equivalent to $500M today, only a small portion of the tab for a Palo Alto trench. It just won’t happen!Clemhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01374282217135682245noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8419444332771213285.post-27135336531825859802017-12-21T14:27:19.867-08:002017-12-21T14:27:19.867-08:00After some digging, I found https://www.princeton....After some digging, I found https://www.princeton.edu/~ota/disk3/1976/7609/760905.PDF<br /><br />Berkeley's bond to put BART underground provided for up to $20m to pay the additional cost of building the 2.75 miles of additional subway (p 22). The final cost was $12.4m. <br /><br />Now I don't know about inflation over 50 years, but I'm guessing that the $12.4m doesn't come anywhere close to compare to the funds Palo Alto would need to raise to put Caltrain below grade. So the "Berkeley did it" argument doesn't really hold up. (But good on Berkeley for doing it back then.)Michaelhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10280692412235449436noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8419444332771213285.post-75146574643925158262017-12-20T22:12:40.271-08:002017-12-20T22:12:40.271-08:00I’d like to point out that trenching the train wou...I’d like to point out that trenching the train would not remove the blight of the Alma traffic sewer, so any pop in property values would likely not be significant. As soon as the train is made quiet (EMUs + quiet zones) the clamor for a trench will die away.Clemhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01374282217135682245noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8419444332771213285.post-65024348842564948122017-12-19T01:44:33.944-08:002017-12-19T01:44:33.944-08:00Unfortunately what you (and any actual trackside d...Unfortunately what you (and any actual trackside dwellers) prefer is irrelevant. The question is what half (or possibly even 2/3) of Palo Alto voters — most of which live well away from the tracks — are willing to pay for absolutely <i><b>zero</b></i> additional transportation benefit over standard and <i>far</i> less costly "split-elevation" grade seps.Reality Checkhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06974156676436895262noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8419444332771213285.post-45862252051655338102017-12-18T20:44:19.372-08:002017-12-18T20:44:19.372-08:00If I had a choice between paying $1800 for a room ...If I had a choice between paying $1800 for a room on Alma near CA/PA station that was that price due to the trains roaring by, or paying $2300 for the same place in the same location but with electric trains running through a trench with walkability over to El Camino and Stanford ... then I'd prefer the second option.<br /><br />And the property owner would, too.Andrewnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8419444332771213285.post-7322821362732601962017-12-18T11:40:28.058-08:002017-12-18T11:40:28.058-08:00 So you are volunteering for your rent to go up $5... So you are volunteering for your rent to go up $500 per month? Neil S.https://www.blogger.com/profile/04678851212711676263noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8419444332771213285.post-6031742258260123122017-12-18T11:11:52.734-08:002017-12-18T11:11:52.734-08:00Well, I live in PA now. I am fairly certain that t...Well, I live in PA now. I am fairly certain that the ultra-wealthy of PA would happily pay for a 10 year tax assessment to trench the train tracks, beautiy the city, make it easier to get their kids to Paly, etc.<br /><br />The property owners along Alma and in "Old Palo Alto" alone would like have plenty of cash to offer up for the benefit. De-training that frontage would likely add $6k/year to rental incomes on even the most modest units there.<br />Considering the value growth of most property in PA has been 125% over the past 6 years, a $200K implied price burden is within reason for even 2br condo's.<br /><br />When I was in Berkeley, I saw neighborhoods that were willing to make investments to add to the value of their houses. Undergrounding utilities was a common one that my former neighborhood of Northside Berkeley was eager to do, money in hand, asking for a 10 year special tax assessment. It turned out that the city literally would not let them do it, because they did not want one wealthier part of the city to become nicer than other parts with less wealth.<br /><br />Of course, that whole city is now the new ultra-wealthy enclave of the whole bay area (apartments in Berkeley rent for more than those in Palo Alto, by a serious margin, and essentially every property is bought with cash), but that's another story for another time.<br /><br />Although I will correct myself on one thing I said above: the idea of a Palo Alto trenching project being doable in 10 years is laughable now that I stand back and think about it. That would be a 40 year generational project.Andrewnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8419444332771213285.post-36856090484963629162017-12-17T07:59:16.448-08:002017-12-17T07:59:16.448-08:00Most people in PA do not live near the tracks nor ...Most people in PA do not live near the tracks nor are most ‘made of money’ (despite what non-PA folks may think). $6k/year at net present value will knock ~$200k off a home value — even if you are the tiny sliver who could afford that you would rather spend it on your kids’ or grandkids’ education or a 2nd home maybe. <br /><br />Andrew: Where do you live and what huge tax increases have you seen passed?Neil S.https://www.blogger.com/profile/04678851212711676263noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8419444332771213285.post-41150314137588550862017-12-16T17:20:41.513-08:002017-12-16T17:20:41.513-08:00$6k/year per property would be a fantastic investm...$6k/year per property would be a fantastic investment for any homeowner here in PA. Most would be pretty eager to buy into it. Most would vote for a tax assessment to fund it, I would think. The resultant appreciation alone would easily, EASILY offset the $6k/year/property for many of the houses around PA's. Probably most of the condos, too. Even if that burden was shifted entirely to the high-end property owners, estimate that they are 25% of the city, $24K/year would still be an incredibly winning investment for them on a 10 or 20 year horizon.<br /><br />The only thing that prevents it from being funded right now, instantly, is that people feel the gut pain of thinking about a 10-year construction project. If was doable in 6 months, it could get funded easily.Andrewnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8419444332771213285.post-41442028152014562822017-11-26T15:37:50.936-08:002017-11-26T15:37:50.936-08:00Fortunately, the final EIR date for SF-SJ has been...Fortunately, the final EIR date for SF-SJ has been pushed back 2 years to 2019, so hopefully they have time to better analyze the overtake options and avoid this potential litigation. The 3 track alignment in this analysis goes all the way from CP Palm to CP Mayfield, which would include Meadow/Charlston. My hope would be that a shorter 3-track section (Maybe from CP Dumbarton to Matadero Creek) would be practical with Caltrain stopping at all stops in between. jpk122shttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15793230015467656460noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8419444332771213285.post-77945002839159719882017-11-25T18:39:17.228-08:002017-11-25T18:39:17.228-08:00Oddly enough, the CHSRA’s own consultant found in ...Oddly enough, the CHSRA’s own consultant found <a href="http://www.tillier.net/stuff/hsr/JSWG_2016_Year_End_Report_final_draft.pdf" rel="nofollow">in their analysis</a> that a long triple-track overtake was far better than any of the options in their draft EIR. Which suggests the draft EIR is broken and wide open to litigation.Clemhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01374282217135682245noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8419444332771213285.post-5200778138295969222017-11-25T14:56:16.890-08:002017-11-25T14:56:16.890-08:00Hopefully Caltrain will cost out a standard split ...Hopefully Caltrain will cost out a standard split grade separation. Do people understand that University and Embarcadero are already separated by going *under* the tracks or how deep to go under San Francisquito Creek?<br /><br />One of the problems is the lies and propaganda spread by anti-rail groups and morons. I recall there was quite a bit of talk in the past (not as much now) of numerous property seizures to accommodate a split/below grade street crossing because it would cause some driveways to results in and elevation change of over 2 feet. Well I see driveways like this all over the peninsula, so what’s the problem?<br /><br />Then there is the cutting of trees BS, that anti-rail people put on a level of the crime of murder… unbelievable!!!<br /><br />Berlin wall… hogwash!!! The ROW is obscured by vegetation through much of Palo Alto.<br />Jeff Carternoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8419444332771213285.post-77071930936667893372017-11-25T14:27:57.541-08:002017-11-25T14:27:57.541-08:00Honestly, I think Caltrain/HSR would be better to ...Honestly, I think Caltrain/HSR would be better to focus on the grade separation opportunities at Alma and Churchill. When combined with the planned grade separation(s) in Menlo Park, this could result in a completely grade separated 3 station stretch from Menlo Park to California Ave. potentially wide enough for at least 3 tracks. Since all Caltrains stop at University Ave., this would be a great overtake location.jpk122shttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15793230015467656460noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8419444332771213285.post-78092117519923597672017-11-25T10:25:59.954-08:002017-11-25T10:25:59.954-08:00You’d almost think that with all the “bury the tra...You’d almost think that with all the “bury the train” fervor, the Alma traffic sewer actually beautifies the city!<br /><br />Also note, the new costing white paper studiously omits any options that raise the rails even one inch. If the city can’t bring itself to cost out a standard split grade sep for Charleston/Meadow, maybe Caltrain will do it for them!Clemhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01374282217135682245noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8419444332771213285.post-83876539891713162212017-11-25T10:04:09.861-08:002017-11-25T10:04:09.861-08:00Per the study. PA property tax increases would be ...Per the study. PA property tax increases would be $1700-$6000 *per year*. All so that a handful of people who bought properties backing on a 150 year old active rail line don’t have to plant some trees on a berm?<br /><br />Other cities pay $100 - $150 million for grade seps, but some folks here think there is a free $1-2B laying around. <br /><br />I don’t have extra $$$ to increase my property taxes by $2k+/year forever (non-deductably from 1040 as you note). And if you wrote property tax checks in PA, you would not either. Neil S.https://www.blogger.com/profile/04678851212711676263noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8419444332771213285.post-7423816545413846342017-11-24T21:03:25.728-08:002017-11-24T21:03:25.728-08:00I dunno. As crazy as a 20%-50% property tax increa...I dunno. As crazy as a 20%-50% property tax increase is (especially with the likely IRS exemption for it ending) I could see a majority of PA voting for it if it "got rid of the trains". They could brand it as a greenbelt initiative, and demand their own 101 trench too. Zuckerberg himself could pay for it like he's paying for Samtrans to study Dumbarton.<br /><br />aarondnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8419444332771213285.post-60531669490531892272017-11-22T21:11:52.259-08:002017-11-22T21:11:52.259-08:00Looks like Palo Alto has a new report on potential...Looks like Palo Alto has a new report on potential financing for grade separations here:<br /><br />http://www.cityofpaloalto.org/civicax/filebank/documents/62296<br /><br />As expected, the only practical way to raise the ~$1B needed even a minimal trench solution (2% grade, Meadow/Charlston only) would include a ~20% property tax increase. (from 1.15% to 1.4% of assessed value). We'll see whether these numbers inject some reality into the conversation there.<br />jpk122shttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15793230015467656460noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8419444332771213285.post-12137619945114966792017-11-14T22:22:33.521-08:002017-11-14T22:22:33.521-08:00HSRA set to pick Deutsche Bahn AG as its early ope...<a href="http://kvpr.org/post/initial-choices-high-speed-rail-pick-its-early-operator" rel="nofollow"><b>HSRA set to pick Deutsche Bahn AG as its early operator at tomorrow's board meeting</b></a>Reality Checkhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06974156676436895262noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8419444332771213285.post-6311604766928433982017-11-03T14:38:40.231-07:002017-11-03T14:38:40.231-07:00Let's have HSR fund the relocation of CEMOF so...Let's have HSR fund the relocation of CEMOF so San Jose can provide more land to Google? Seems totally reasonable, given the history of decision-making for transit in the 408.<br />Michaelhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10280692412235449436noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8419444332771213285.post-61859404989819897542017-11-02T22:52:19.010-07:002017-11-02T22:52:19.010-07:00( ... continued from preivous posting ...)
While ...( ... continued from preivous posting ...)<br /><br />While neither consulting firm has released a preliminary report, city transportation head Jim Ortbal said work so far is looking at eliminating a viaduct down the median of Monterey Highway south of downtown by using a trench instead, something high-speed rail has been investigating on its own.<br /><br />HDR is looking at how to unclog the Diridon yard. The station is where many Caltrain and all Amtrak Capitol Corridor trains terminate, are serviced and then head back north.<br /><br />The 2008 law authorizing the high-speed rail project requires that trains be able to bypass any station at mainline speed to provide the operational capability for local and express trains.<br /><br />One possible way to remove parked trains from Diridon would be to relocate Caltrain’s CEMOF (Centralized Equipment Maintenance & Operations Facility) — now located alongside the Caltrain right-of-way between Lenzen Avenue and West Taylor Street – to somewhere south of Diridon.<br /><br />The facility cost $140 million when it was opened 10 years ago and employs 100 mechanical department workers and is the base for 120 train crew. A Caltrain spokesman could not be reached for comment, but that railroad is intimately involved in the joint planning for a new Diridon Station as its owner and largest user.<br /><br />Three railroads<br /><br />The Valley Transportation Authority, which now runs light rail trains and buses through the station, is working on the project to extend BART to Diridon within a year of high-speed rail’s arrival and also is affected by the state system’s plans.<br /><br />All three railroads and the city are involved in the planning effort.<br /><br />“After we meet all the operational needs and the user experience — we want the station to be beautiful,” said Chris Augenstein, VTA’s planning director. “We want it to be something others look at and say, ‘Wow!, they did such a great job in San Jose, we want to go there and learn how to do this right.’ That’s what everybody is coalescing around.”<br /><br />Richard volunteered in his interview that high-speed rail established a “very aggressive schedule” for environmental approvals in its 2016 business plan because getting the railroad up and running is key to its survival as a project.<br /><br />A revised environmental clearance schedule “will be part and parcel of a broad look at where the program is that we’ll be reporting on as we develop our (2018) business plan,” he said.Reality Checkhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06974156676436895262noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8419444332771213285.post-52723324837651877922017-11-02T22:50:12.771-07:002017-11-02T22:50:12.771-07:00Published Thursday, November 2, 2017 by the Silico...Published Thursday, November 2, 2017 by the Silicon Valley Business Journal<br /><br /><a href="https://www.bizjournals.com/sanjose/news/2017/11/02/why-high-speed-rail-is-holding-off-on-diridon.html" rel="nofollow"><b>Why high-speed rail is holding off on Diridon Station viaduct plan</b></a><br />San Jose's search for alternative to high-speed rail's Diridon Station viaduct slows project<br /><br />By Jody Meacham<br />Reporter, Silicon Valley Business Journal<br /><br />Click here to exit the Mercury Reader view<br /><br />www.bizjournals.combizjournals.com<br />San Jose's search for alternative to high-speed rail's Diridon Station viaduct slows project - Silicon Valley Business Journal<br />Nov. 2nd, 2017<br /><br />Send to Kindle<br />California high-speed rail is delaying filing federal paperwork for its alignment through San Jose’s Diridon Station while consultants hired by the city look for possible alternatives to the elevated tracks it wants to build through downtown.<br /><br />While the delay should only be a couple of months, it is significant for a city where Diridon’s emergence as a major transportation hub — envisioned as a huge driver of downtown development — might instead further splinter downtown with a huge elevated structure, much as the Guadalupe Freeway did when it split downtown into eastern and western sections in the 1980s.<br /><br />The agreement to delay was struck in an Oct. 19 meeting between Mayor Sam Liccardo and Dan Richard, chair of the California High-Speed Rail Authority board. Richard drove to San Jose following a Sacramento board meeting to meet face-to-face about the issue.<br /><br />“The mayor asked if I would be open to having our organization give the city time to develop an alternative alignment or alignments that they could talk with us about,” Richard said Wednesday.<br /><br />Given Diridon’s position as the northern terminus of the initial operating segment, planned to open in 2025, and its future status as the high-speed rail system’s largest transportation hub, Richard said he agreed.<br /><br />“They didn’t want to have door slammed on them,” Richard said. “They wanted to have time to develop some additional thinking on this. I was appreciative of the mayor’s outreach and I wanted to respond in kind.”<br /><br />Liccardo said: “Chairman Richard gets it about the importance of building a system that will meet the goals of Californians and also meets the goals of those cities like San Jose that provide a critical path for the system’s success.”<br /><br />The city is spending $90,000 for a study by Omaha-based HDR, Inc., on possible alternatives to a viaduct that would carry high-speed trains for most of the 21 miles they would travel within the city limits. It's spending another $70,000 with Exeltech Consulting of Lacey, Washington, to study the feasibility of an underground high-speed station at Diridon. Their findings are expected to be released in January.<br /><br />Other options<br /><br />High-speed rail’s planners have been saying since October 2016 that they had dropped consideration of below-ground and at-grade alignments. The underground decision was because of unsafe soil and water table conditions beneath Diridon.<br /><br />The at-grade alignment along Caltrain’s route would further adversely affect the Gardner neighborhood, split first by the railroad and later by the I-280 and Guadalupe freeways. That option also raises the possibility of high-speed train delays in an already crowded train yard at Diridon.<br /><br />Almost every special interest downtown from business to residents and the Gardner neighborhood would prefer a tunnel and underground station as the option least disruptive to the status quo, but no one disputes that option would be the most expensive.<br /><br />The underground station's status as dangerous to build and possibly to use because of underground water has been hotly disputed at public meetings by engineers.<br /><br />“The good news is that we’re learning that some barriers can be overcome as we seek to ensure that (high-speed rail) is a train that will serve our residents and our community,” Liccardo said.<br /><br />( ... article continues ...)Reality Checkhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06974156676436895262noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8419444332771213285.post-80347739964481602752017-10-30T19:46:39.397-07:002017-10-30T19:46:39.397-07:00That link is from August and there have been sever...That link is from August and there have been several meetings since then. My understanding is that they have settled on an car underpass at Mary Ave., maybe with a jughandle connection to Evelyn. At Sunnyvale ave, they are still considering a bike/ped only undercrossing. See this more recent document:<br /><br />https://sunnyvale.ca.gov/civica/filebank/blobdload.asp?BlobID=25150jpk122shttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15793230015467656460noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8419444332771213285.post-78257334754105557222017-10-30T18:23:42.199-07:002017-10-30T18:23:42.199-07:00Sunnyvale grade separation documents are out. Look...Sunnyvale grade separation documents are out. Looks like they favor an underpass for cars in both places.<br /><br />https://sunnyvale.ca.gov/civicax/filebank/blobdload.aspx?blobid=24994<br /><br />Strabo the Lesserhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17513526644525400896noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8419444332771213285.post-16938010539044111362017-10-26T20:16:40.212-07:002017-10-26T20:16:40.212-07:00Re-reading your post with attention to funding. Le...Re-reading your post with attention to funding. Let's assume the magical tunnel unicorn can put the trains underground without any shoo-fly intruding on Alma or adjacent residences. What will the city put on top to capture some value to cover some of the construction cost? Where there isn't "open space", housing is probably a good bet. Are people going to flock to single-family homes whose driveways line Alma? More likely are condo/apartments in the standard 4-story configuration. I would rather have a berm backing to my home than four stories of neighbors. Michaelhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10280692412235449436noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8419444332771213285.post-67019804532251154242017-10-23T21:02:32.876-07:002017-10-23T21:02:32.876-07:00Higher costs.
PLUS Higher risk. Oh yeah. Yeah ba...Higher costs.<br />PLUS Higher risk. Oh yeah. Yeah baby, run in up. Oh yeah.<br />PLUS Longer (infinitely longer, ideally, and almost certainly) project delivery time<br />PLUS Worse service. For everybody, everywhere!<br />PLUS Greater impacts.<br />PLUS (did I mention?) higher costs MULTIPLIED by (did I mention?) "unexpectedly" "unforseeable" higher risks MULTIPLIED BY (did I mention?) hugely prolonged endless-deferred reprogrammed/rephased/repackaged/restaged/restructured project "schedules"?<br /><br />What's not to like?<br /><br />Who's not profiting?<br /><br />Screw Altamont! The system is working as designed.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com